My thinking and research melds normative standards from political philosophy and feasibility insights from economics and empirical research. I hold the belief that the rules and policies which one can morally defend, need to be compatible with a realistic understanding of the motivations and limited knowledge of the individuals that will enforce them or live under them. This means that, for instance, if I write on tax policy, I look at models and data of how individuals within democratic processes actually decide on tax policy.
Next to building in some form of feasibility constraint, my research revolves around concrete policy issues. Although I’m also drawn to “first principle debates” (what distinguishes law from morality?), philosophers have not been working as much on the operationalization of their ideas in concrete areas of law. Applied political and legal philosophy is the domain where the work needs to be done.
For instance, while most political philosophers raise ideas on redistribution, virtually none of them have a theory of taxation mapped out. And although legal philosophers are either favorable or skeptical regarding the right to property, not many of them write about specific property arrangements, for instance with regards to environmental issues. My inclination to zoom in on these specific problems is strengthened by my law background, as in general, jurists are educated with a casuistic outlook – the content of specific principles is discovered through their application in specific cases.
So, as their titles might suggest, my publications often relate to very tangible policies (e.g. increased “sin” taxes on consumption of unhealthy goods, uniform flat taxes, centralized responses to environmental issues). If you read these publications, you’ll find out that I connect these specific policies with the work of grand theorists like John Stuart Mill, John Rawls or Elinor Ostrom.
In evaluating their justifiability, I apply considerations of justice (is a rule fair to all parties concerned?) and investigate the relevant feasibility constraints (is this rule compatible with the reality of human opportunism and our imperfect access to information?).